Great read from Brad Oremland: NFL top 100 QBs of all time

[Shane Bond]

http://www.footballperspective.com/guest-post-brad-oremlands-best-qbs-in-history-1-5/

[Bubbz]

Clearly accurate, dude has it nailed down to a science

[bestQBever]

I guess this guy doesn't care about playoff accomplishments...

[southwest1]

Great write up on QB Warren Moon who "threw maybe the most perfect spiral in history,...succeeded at every level of football, and he was the most dominant QB in the CFL, & "the Oilers made seven straight playoff appearances from 1987-93."

 

Warren never gets enough credit for his longevity & whatever team he was the QB for he made that squad instantly relevant by virtue of lining up under center. 

[Bluefire4]

I guess this guy doesn't care about playoff accomplishments...

I think it's pretty overrated myself to tell the truth. A lack of playoff success should not negate the stats and effort a player has. It's a team sport.

[tpry1965]

This is seriously a great read. Really good stuff.

 

Also, im new so could someone please start a thread on this:

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2517805-br-nfl-1000-top-1000-players/page/11

 

I have some things to say…

[CR91]

I think it's pretty overrated myself to tell the truth. A lack of playoff success should not negate the stats and effort a player has. It's a team sport.

 

so why does andy dalton get so much hate when all hes done is go to the playoffs every year hes been in the league

[amfootball]

TC can't get here soon enough.

[AntonMcG]

Wonderful article showing the breadth and depth in his assessments. The years of research to pull that together is something that should be commended. Few (if any) others, can claim to have such a comprehensive analysis and therefore be qualified to make such a list.

[Surge89]

I've said this plenty of times.  The biggest point that most forget is that Manning is the first Legendary QB to accomplish great things without a revolutionary coach beside him.  Dungy (as much as I liked him) is not BB, Schula, or Walsh.  While you look back at this previous decade its hard to distinguish whether it was Brady who carried the team or BB's ability to manipulate a team that has a star QB (something that no coach has done in the salary cap era). Many will argue that BB was nothing before, but that is completely irrelevant as he is the ONLY coach to understand how to manage a team with a star QB in the Salary cap era when he got one.  Look at Drew Brees, Manning, Rodgers, heck even Favre's teams were lopsided near the end of his career.  Look at Denver now... They have Manning and think that a few defensive stars will complete their team when in fact they just have a very below average defense with a couple of names.  They'll never learn.

 

Manning is the only QB in history that has done it alone.  Talent doesn't mean anything if the coach's don't put the players in a place to succeed. 

[amfootball]

I've said this plenty of times.  The biggest point that most forget is that Manning is the first Legendary QB to accomplish great things without a revolutionary coach beside him.  Dungy (as much as I liked him) is not BB, Schula, or Walsh.  While you look back at this previous decade its hard to distinguish whether it was Brady who carried the team or BB's ability to manipulate a team that has a star QB (something that no coach has done in the salary cap era). Many will argue that BB was nothing before, but that is completely irrelevant as he is the ONLY coach to understand how to manage a team with a star QB in the Salary cap era when he got one.  Look at Drew Brees, Manning, Rodgers, heck even Favre's teams were lopsided near the end of his career.  Look at Denver now... They have Manning and think that a few defensive stars will complete their team when in fact they just have a very below average defense with a couple of names.  They'll never learn.

 

Manning is the only QB in history that has done it alone.  Talent doesn't mean anything if the coach's don't put the players in a place to succeed. 

Tony Dungy is considered by many to be a top 20/25 coach of all time.

[Bluefire4]

so why does andy dalton get so much hate when all hes done is go to the playoffs every year hes been in the league

Because he's never won so he doesn't have playoff success. Plus his regular seasons aren't anything special.

[Surge89]

Tony Dungy is considered by many to be a top 20/25 coach of all time.

 

By people who don't understand football.  Anyone else knows he will be in the HoF for being the first African American coach to win a Superbowl and that is it. He mismanaged teams and had a scheme that didn't fit his players. You like to grasp at straws don't you?

[amfootball]

By people who don't understand football.  Anyone else knows he will be in the HoF for being the firs African American coach to win a Superbowl and that is it. He mismanaged teams and had a scheme that didn't fit his players. You like to grasp at straws don't you?

Just trying to keep it real. Manning has not played for bums even though I do think he has lacked a truly great head coach and has had some clowns in there too. But he did have two GMs in both Polian and Elway that have made sure he was surrounded on offense with elite talent year in and year out.

[FanFromtheWasteland]

Had to look sideways a little bit when I saw Jeff George on the list

[Yehoodi]

I've said this plenty of times.  The biggest point that most forget is that Manning is the first Legendary QB to accomplish great things without a revolutionary coach beside him.  Dungy (as much as I liked him) is not BB, Schula, or Walsh.  While you look back at this previous decade its hard to distinguish whether it was Brady who carried the team or BB's ability to manipulate a team that has a star QB (something that no coach has done in the salary cap era). Many will argue that BB was nothing before, but that is completely irrelevant as he is the ONLY coach to understand how to manage a team with a star QB in the Salary cap era when he got one.  Look at Drew Brees, Manning, Rodgers, heck even Favre's teams were lopsided near the end of his career.  Look at Denver now... They have Manning and think that a few defensive stars will complete their team when in fact they just have a very below average defense with a couple of names.  They'll never learn.

 

Manning is the only QB in history that has done it alone.  Talent doesn't mean anything if the coach's don't put the players in a place to succeed. 

 

A couple of things.

 

First, if Manning does not throw 4 picks in the 2003 AFCCG, maybe Dungy has two SB rings and BB, until this year, would likewise only have two SBs rings.  So in some ways you create your own resume and others too by ones own play.   A lot of folks like to downplay Dungy, but he built a great team in Tampa, that was good enough to win a SB the year he left, and when he arrived in Indy, and through some drafts, had that team go on a tear of 12+ win seasons when the team was basically a 0.500 team with Manning before he arrived in Indy.   Bottom line if that AFCCG does not go the way it did, the BB card is not so easily pulled as both he and Dungy have the same number of SB rings.  And even without that game, Dungy resume in Indy after he arrived is very very impressive, not to mention what he did in Tampa. 

 

Second, regarding front office.  I think one of the strength's of Brady is the fact that the pats FO knows they have him and he can take care of things on the offensive side of the ball.  Basically, they do not pay for high price players and will let them go and will deal with good deals knowing they have Brady to take care of things.   For example if the pats were the 2014 Broncos they would not be messing around with D. Thomas and would let him walk and the team would have to make due with Sanders and what ever else they could find in FA.  So a lot of teams could follow what the pats do, its simple, do not pay the highest, or near the highest, at any position, and let players go a year or two early, it is not rocket science what the pats do, any team could do it if they wanted.

[Surge89]

A couple of things.

 

First, if Manning does not throw 4 picks in the 2003 AFCCG, maybe Dungy has two SB rings and BB, until this year, would likewise only have two SBs rings.  So in some ways you create your own resume and others too by ones own play.   A lot of folks like to downplay Dungy, but he built a great team in Tampa, that was good enough to win a SB the year he left, and when he arrived in Indy, and through some drafts, had that team go on a tear of 12+ win seasons when the team was basically a 0.500 team with Manning before he arrived in Indy.   Bottom line if that AFCCG does not go the way it did, the BB card is not so easily pulled as both he and Dungy have the same number of SB rings.  And even without that game, Dungy resume in Indy after he arrived is very very impressive, not to mention what he did in Tampa. 

 

Second, regarding front office.  I think one of the strength's of Brady is the fact that the pats FO knows they have him and he can take care of things on the offensive side of the ball.  Basically, they do not pay for high price players and will let them go and will deal with good deals knowing they have Brady to take care of things.   For example if the pats were the 2014 Broncos they would not be messing around with D. Thomas and would let him walk and the team would have to make due with Sanders and what ever else they could find in FA.  So a lot of teams could follow what the pats do, its simple, do not pay the highest, or near the highest, at any position, and let players go a year or two early, it is not rocket science what the pats do, any team could do it if they wanted.

 

You are creating something that didn't happen first off.  2nd the reason why Dungy is downplayed because the evidence is there to downplay.  He built a team from his scheme in tampa right?  What was it again? oh that is right a defensive team... and guess what he didn't do in Indy?  turn them into a defensive powerhouse...  Also guess what Manning did with and without Dungy?  (Before and After I might add) take his team to 12 win seasons....  Everything you just posted is so shallow on Dungy its just the usual rhetoric attempting to turn Dungy into something he isn't... A revolutionary coach...  He isn't.  He created a scheme that he lucked into having the perfect players for in Tampa.  That is pretty much the only thing he has done...  Everything else teams did or were doing without him and just continued while he was there.  

 

This paragraph is the most accurate thing that has ever been voiced lol.  It is so simple but everyone is really really dumb.  And my point remains BB and the Pats are the only ones to do it. 

[Surge89]

Just trying to keep it real. Manning has not played for bums even though I do think he has lacked a truly great head coach and has had some clowns in there too. But he did have two GMs in both Polian and Elway that have made sure he was surrounded on offense with elite talent year in and year out.

 

Lol.. you and the statement keeping it real is full of bitter irony.

 

 

Manning played for a coach that couldn't adjust nor manage his players.  And 2 other coaches that often looked lost.  Let's not bring up Fox because that is just to painful.  Again the talent doesn't matter if 1.  The coach can't utilize and 2. If the talent has nothing else around it

 

You act like you haven't seen Patriots teams before lol... They don't have stars.  They have well balanced deep teams around all of their key players.  No one does the job alone.  That is what a team is.  The only org in the NFL that understands it in the salary cap era.

[Gramz]

http://www.footballperspective.com/guest-post-brad-oremlands-best-qbs-in-history-1-5/

Great Read. Thanks.

A lot of people forget about Otto Graham, and it was nice to read the write up on him, as well as many others mentioned.

And, of course, I agree with the #1 as well.

[pgt_rob]

Takes a team to win a championship. Not just a QB and that's it.

[amfootball]

 So a lot of teams could follow what the pats do, its simple, do not pay the highest, or near the highest, at any position, and let players go a year or two early, it is not rocket science what the pats do, any team could do it if they wanted.

I am not sure about this Yehoodi. Many teams have tried to copy the Pats and have failed I think for a few reasons.

 

First, Belichick is great at finding players for his scheme and then most importantly coaching them up. Not sure if you read the article on Brandon Lafell this past week, http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4782546/brandon-lafell-sees-growth-from-patriots-qb-jimmy-garoppolo   but he talked about how in Carolina they just had him run go routes because of his speed but Bill saw physical he was and had him doing the deep in cuts to take advantage of his ability to break tackles and get extra yards. He talked about how he feels like the Pats took advantage of his whole skill set.

 

Second, to your point about contracts, the Pats do move on BUT more importantly they replace those players with quality FAs or draft choices. They had Edelman in the wings when Welker left. They have Easley, Siligia, Branch and of course drafted Brown to replace Wilfork.

 

Bill also has an owner in Kraft that lets him have full control over all football decisions and not all GMs have that type of power and Bill has had that from day one before his SB wins.

 

Lastly, Brady makes the entire thing go. As the writer of this article stated, Brady has not had consistent top level talent around him but has had the Pats in the top 3 of offenses of points scored for the last 10 years. That stat is remarkable and helps makes Bill's job A LOT easier.

[dw49]

Tony Dungy is considered by many to be a top 20/25 coach of all time.

 

 

Those "many" could not have been watching CBS at 1PM , January 15th , 2006. 

[Yehoodi]

You are creating something that didn't happen first off.  2nd the reason why Dungy is downplayed because the evidence is there to downplay.  He built a team from his scheme in tampa right?  What was it again? oh that is right a defensive team... and guess what he didn't do in Indy?  turn them into a defensive powerhouse...  Also guess what Manning did with and without Dungy?  (Before and After I might add) take his team to 12 win seasons....  Everything you just posted is so shallow on Dungy its just the usual rhetoric attempting to turn Dungy into something he isn't... A revolutionary coach...  He isn't.  He created a scheme that he lucked into having the perfect players for in Tampa.  That is pretty much the only thing he has done...  Everything else teams did or were doing without him and just continued while he was there.  

 

This paragraph is the most accurate thing that has ever been voiced lol.  It is so simple but everyone is really really dumb.  And my point remains BB and the Pats are the only ones to do it. 

 

Funny you want to qualify the 03 AFCCG into what happen and not see it for what it is, then you want to quality what Dungy did in Tampa.   You need to be more consistent. 

 

Yes, what happened happened in '03, but what happened happened in Tampa.  You call is luck I call it "reality", just like you call "reality" of the 2003 AFCCG, so pick a position and stick to it, please don't waffle in the same post to try to make your argument that you cant make. 

 

Yes Manning has had success outside of Dungy, but he has also had 3-13, 6-10, and two 10-6 seasons, with Dungy, the colts had one 10-6 season (first year) then the went on to win many 12+ wins seasons.  Dungy was not as bad as some may think.

 

And again, BB resume is largely due to his SB wins and playoff records, if the former or both is changed, then his resume will go up or down accordingly.   And as such, one can look at those things to get a better idea of the quality of coach and understand that fate can sometimes change things, but one can still look at the body work outside of that fate to get a better gauge on ones resume.  

 

For example Brady's fate and resume was effected by Woodsen getting to Brady too soon in the snow bowl game, Bennett not hauling in a catch in 2003, Tyree/Manningham/Welker, and most recently Butler.   All of those have an impact on a resume, but one can look beyond them and see that Brady help get his team in position to win a title and fate took over in both positive and negative directions.  Folks can not say "gees we are two plays from 6-0" and not recognized Butler and Woodsen, and vice versa.  So one can look at both a body of work and what actually happens to get a good gauge on one resume, player or coach, that was my point.    

[Yehoodi]

Those "many" could not have been watching CBS at 1PM , January 15th , 2006. 

 

Perhaps,

 

But those same "many" were watching the following year's playoffs

 

And those "many" likely watched SB 37 with a team largely built by Dungy 

 

And those "many" likely watch and hear Tampa 2 mentioned, and implemented, on a regular basis

 

And those "many" likely watched several 12+ wins seasons in Indy

 

And those "many" likely watched the coaches from his coaching tree, one of whom made it to a SB in '09, won a title as an OC in Baltimore and took Detroit to the playoffs last year, and another made it to a SB in '06.

 

and so on . . .

[Surge89]

Funny you want to qualify the 03 AFCCG into what happen and not see it for what it is, then you want to quality what Dungy did in Tampa.   You need to be more consistent. 

 

Yes, what happened happened in '03, but what happened happened in Tampa.  You call is luck I call it "reality", just like you call "reality" of the 2003 AFCCG, so pick a position and stick to it, please don't waffle in the same post to try to make your argument that you cant make. 

 

Yes Manning has had success outside of Dungy, but he has also had 3-13, 6-10, and two 10-6 seasons, with Dungy, the colts had one 10-6 season (first year) then the went on to win many 12+ wins seasons.  Dungy was not as bad as some may think.

 

And again, BB resume is largely due to his SB wins and playoff records, if the former or both is changed, then his resume will go up or down accordingly.   And as such, one can look at those things to get a better idea of the quality of coach and understand that fate can sometimes change things, but one can still look at the body work outside of that fate to get a better gauge on ones resume.  

 

For example Brady's fate and resume was effected by Woodsen getting to Brady too soon in the snow bowl game, Bennett not hauling in a catch in 2003, Tyree/Manningham/Welker, and most recently Butler.   All of those have an impact on a resume, but one can look beyond them and see that Brady help get his team in position to win a title and fate took over in both positive and negative directions.  Folks can not say "gees we are two plays from 6-0" and not recognized Butler and Woodsen, and vice versa.  So one can look at both a body of work and what actually happens to get a good gauge on one resume, player or coach, that was my point.    

 

How is it that me not qualifying you're pretend instance in which the Patriots lose in the 2003 AFC champ game ignoring reality?  That makes no sense.  I'm just not basing my argument on one made up conclusion to one game.  What happened in Tampa happened and didn't even remotely reoccur.. That is fact...  So again how am I dismissing one for the other?  This is reality I'm speaking not a made up scenario in which a game doesn't end the way you want it to, so you can inflate Dungy.  

 

I call it Luck because Dungy could never replicate without amazing talent.  He couldn't even field a decent defense unless he had a star player that fit exactly to his perfect scheme and even then the defense was only average. Again I haven't waffled... which is more than I can say for the rest of this post...

 

So BB's resume is now the superbowl wins and titles...  Not his roster management which is literally the only thing anyone talks about when its BB. Those wins and titles are always credited to Brady but now they are credited to BB?  Lol no... get consistent.  BB needs to have credit because he understands how to successfully manage a team in the salary cap era. Pretty simple.  So  you are saying because BB could've coached teams that lost on the field he would be less of a coach than he is?  LOL now I understand the point of view on Manning.  The fact is when BB got a franchise QB he knew what to do with it.  And no matter the make believe wins and losses you attempt to create he always had teams with no real deficiency and always in contention.

 

Again you are talking hypothetical that somehow create a world in which Dungy is a revolutionary coach...   Dungy while a coach that can keep the ship afloat brought nothing to Indy.  That is a fact.  Nothing chaged when he left nor from when he got here.  The constant... Manning.

[Yehoodi]

I am not sure about this Yehoodi. Many teams have tried to copy the Pats and have failed I think for a few reasons.

 

First, Belichick is great at finding players for his scheme and then most importantly coaching them up. Not sure if you read the article on Brandon Lafell this past week, http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4782546/brandon-lafell-sees-growth-from-patriots-qb-jimmy-garoppolo   but he talked about how in Carolina they just had him run go routes because of his speed but Bill saw physical he was and had him doing the deep in cuts to take advantage of his ability to break tackles and get extra yards. He talked about how he feels like the Pats took advantage of his whole skill set.

 

Second, to your point about contracts, the Pats do move on BUT more importantly they replace those players with quality FAs or draft choices. They had Edelman in the wings when Welker left. They have Easley, Siligia, Branch and of course drafted Brown to replace Wilfork.

 

Bill also has an owner in Kraft that lets him have full control over all football decisions and not all GMs have that type of power and Bill has had that from day one before his SB wins.

 

Lastly, Brady makes the entire thing go. As the writer of this article stated, Brady has not had consistent top level talent around him but has had the Pats in the top 3 of offenses of points scored for the last 10 years. That stat is remarkable and helps makes Bill's job A LOT easier.

 

I hear yah AM.  And yes they do make out better perhaps with their bargain basement shopping.  However, I think there are some that will want to credit BB more than what Brady should be given credit for making best use of the groceries so to speak. 

 

And it is nice that Kraft gives him full reign on the personnel duties. 

 

Thanks for the article, I will take a look at it.

 

Yes for the most part they can find replacements, but not always, like Beisel & Brown in 2005 and Caldwell and company in 2006 to name a few.

 

As for other teams, if I were a GM and/or coach/GM and had Manning as a QB, I would do the same approach as what the pats do. 

[amfootball]

I hear yah AM.  And yes they do make out better perhaps with their bargain basement shopping.  However, I think there are some that will want to credit BB more than what Brady should be given credit for making best use of the groceries so to speak. 

 

And it is nice that Kraft gives him full reign on the personnel duties. 

 

Thanks for the article, I will take a look at it.

 

Yes for the most part they can find replacements, but not always, like Beisel & Brown in 2005 and Caldwell and company in 2006 to name a few.

 

As for other teams, if I were a GM and/or coach/GM and had Manning as a QB, I would do the same approach as what the pats do. 

Sure, Brady has covered for many of Bill's misses which is why it starts and ends with the players on the field of which the QB is the most important. I always find the discussion of the great coach/QB to be fascinating. It is a bit like the chicken and egg. Who came first and would one be as successful without the other?

 

I remember Walsh saying on the Football Life documentary that he specifically waited until the third round to get Montana as he knew he was the right QB to run his west coast system. He could have picked up higher for a QB but he waited for Montana. Then as comparison, I remember Belichick saying he had Brady on his board because he rarely turned over the ball and made quality decisions on each play and when he dropped down, he felt there was too much value there to pass him up even though the Pats were stacked at QB.

 

I do think there is a lot of truth to the marriage made in heaven. For some coaches and Qbs they go together hand in hand and as a result something special happens on the field.

[CR91]

Because he's never won so he doesn't have playoff success. Plus his regular seasons aren't anything special.

 

you just said a lack of playoff success is overrated so why does it matter if he hasnt won a playoff game based off your opinion? through three seasons, he had similar stats to peyton so your claim his regular seasons arent special is flawed.

[Gramz]

Wow, people can argue about just about anything.

I imagine some just quickly glanced at the list, to see where their favorite player was listed.

Those that actually took the time to read the entire article, and the analysis and reasoning behind the list seem to be able to appreciate it.

[Bluefire4]

you just said a lack of playoff success is overrated so why does it matter if he hasnt won a playoff game based off your opinion? through three seasons, he had similar stats to peyton so your claim his regular seasons arent special is flawed.

You're just making my point. People don't like Andy Dalton because he doesn't win but the success he's had is diminished which is why playoff success is overrated.. Though I was thinking more established names.

[Yehoodi]

How is it that me not qualifying you're pretend instance in which the Patriots lose in the 2003 AFC champ game ignoring reality?  That makes no sense.  I'm just not basing my argument on one made up conclusion to one game.  What happened in Tampa happened and didn't even remotely reoccur.. That is fact...  So again how am I dismissing one for the other?  This is reality I'm speaking not a made up scenario in which a game doesn't end the way you want it to, so you can inflate Dungy.  

 

I call it Luck because Dungy could never replicate without amazing talent.  He couldn't even field a decent defense unless he had a star player that fit exactly to his perfect scheme and even then the defense was only average. Again I haven't waffled... which is more than I can say for the rest of this post...

 

So BB's resume is now the superbowl wins and titles...  Not his roster management which is literally the only thing anyone talks about when its BB. Those wins and titles are always credited to Brady but now they are credited to BB?  Lol no... get consistent.  BB needs to have credit because he understands how to successfully manage a team in the salary cap era. Pretty simple.  So  you are saying because BB could've coached teams that lost on the field he would be less of a coach than he is?  LOL now I understand the point of view on Manning.  The fact is when BB got a franchise QB he knew what to do with it.  And no matter the make believe wins and losses you attempt to create he always had teams with no real deficiency and always in contention.

 

Again you are talking hypothetical that somehow create a world in which Dungy is a revolutionary coach...   Dungy while a coach that can keep the ship afloat brought nothing to Indy.  That is a fact.  Nothing chaged when he left nor from when he got here.  The constant... Manning.

 

Man you are all over the place . . .  My middle name is Consistent.  My points are only directed to the critics of Tony Dungy and more often than not they complain about his post season record as a reflection of how "average" he is as a coach.   And the same time those folks will complain that Manning was "held back" by an "average" coach and the coach is "average" due to his playoff record.  

 

Problem arises for me with respect to being "held back by an average coach" as being absolute definitive 100% proven point is the fact that is not 100% proven or correct and that one needs to on some level to qualify things, that is all.  Now DO NOT GET the impression that I am trying to say the qualifying points are 100% proven the other way to make a coach an otherwise goat coach, but just a factor, and only a factor, but nonetheless one that needs to be considered. 

 

And all my original point was when one tries to claim that Dungy is average due to x, y, and z and too bad for his players, but yet when one steps back and sees, in their opinion, that any said player is responsible on some level, again not 100% responsible but partially responsible, for a portion of the z part of the coaches resume, you need to look at that when claiming he was "held back."   That is all. 

 

You can not start a house fire and be responsible for the same and then complain gee aren't you lucky your house did not burn down, your house is better than mine, whoo is me.

 

Bottom line I think Dungy is a much better coach than what most colts fans will claim.           

 

BB coaching record is 211-109 (0.659), 12 division titles in 20 years, Dungy coaching record is 139-69 (0.668), 6 division titles in 15 years.   If BB is in the discussion as a goat level coach, then Dungy is not certainly not average.   If fact, Dungy's resume is not that much different than John Madden's, and most would consider Madden a great coach.

[Yehoodi]

Great Read. Thanks.

A lot of people forget about Otto Graham, and it was nice to read the write up on him, as well as many others mentioned.

And, of course, I agree with the #1 as well.

 

Yes it was a nice read, and glad to see there is some love for Otto Graham

[21isSuperman]

Perhaps,

 

But those same "many" were watching the following year's playoffs

 

And those "many" likely watched SB 37 with a team largely built by Dungy 

This comment always confuses me.  If the team that Dungy built won the Super Bowl, why couldn't Dungy win it with them?  He wasn't what that team needed as a coach.  Gruden was able to get them to the next level.  Sure, Dungy built them.  But he didn't win the Super Bowl with them.

 

And those "many" likely watch and hear Tampa 2 mentioned, and implemented, on a regular basis

 

And those "many" likely watched several 12+ wins seasons in Indy

Due primarily to Peyton, not Dungy

 

And those "many" likely watched the coaches from his coaching tree, one of whom made it to a SB in '09, won a title as an OC in Baltimore and took Detroit to the playoffs last year, and another made it to a SB in '06.

Doesn't mean he's a good coach.  He might be able to teach his coordinators well or perhaps he simply knows how to find good coordinators, but that doesn't mean he was a good coach.

 

and so on . . .

[dw49]

Perhaps,

 

But those same "many" were watching the following year's playoffs

 

And those "many" likely watched SB 37 with a team largely built by Dungy 

 

And those "many" likely watch and hear Tampa 2 mentioned, and implemented, on a regular basis

 

And those "many" likely watched several 12+ wins seasons in Indy

 

And those "many" likely watched the coaches from his coaching tree, one of whom made it to a SB in '09, won a title as an OC in Baltimore and took Detroit to the playoffs last year, and another made it to a SB in '06.

 

and so on . . .

 

 

Depends where you want to put the credit. Poilan built the Colt teams and IMO Manning was responsible for the 12 win seasons.  Dungy was horribly out coached in the Pitt game. Not too many 12 point favorites get crushed in a playoff game. And they were no doubt badly beaten. Pitt went conservative and Indy caught 2 huge breaks and still lost. I guess you can blame it on his son's tragic death and give him a pass that way. Otherwise it was a totally inexcusable, huge loss that more than likely cost that team a SB. 

[21isSuperman]

I am not sure about this Yehoodi. Many teams have tried to copy the Pats and have failed I think for a few reasons.

 

First, Belichick is great at finding players for his scheme and then most importantly coaching them up. Not sure if you read the article on Brandon Lafell this past week, http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4782546/brandon-lafell-sees-growth-from-patriots-qb-jimmy-garoppolo   but he talked about how in Carolina they just had him run go routes because of his speed but Bill saw physical he was and had him doing the deep in cuts to take advantage of his ability to break tackles and get extra yards. He talked about how he feels like the Pats took advantage of his whole skill set.

 

Second, to your point about contracts, the Pats do move on BUT more importantly they replace those players with quality FAs or draft choices. They had Edelman in the wings when Welker left. They have Easley, Siligia, Branch and of course drafted Brown to replace Wilfork.

 

Bill also has an owner in Kraft that lets him have full control over all football decisions and not all GMs have that type of power and Bill has had that from day one before his SB wins.

 

Lastly, Brady makes the entire thing go. As the writer of this article stated, Brady has not had consistent top level talent around him but has had the Pats in the top 3 of offenses of points scored for the last 10 years. That stat is remarkable and helps makes Bill's job A LOT easier.

This is the interesting part, and where I think Belichick/the Pats did a better job with Brady than Polian/the Colts did with Peyton.  If I have a superstar QB like Brady, Peyton, or Luck, I want to spend high draft picks on the defense and find big name free agents for the defense.  I know my QB will be able to improve the guys around him, put them in the right places, make average guys look good, make good guys like great, etc.  I'll do my best to make the defense as strong as possible, knowing my QB will take care of the offense.

 

With that said, some claim the opposite.  You have a superstar QB talent, so you should surround him with a lot of talent and help him reach his potential. 

 

I understand that second line of thinking, but I don't agree with it.

[Gavin]

Great article, I disagree with some of the rankings but that's to be expected

[dw49]

 

Perhaps,

 

But those same "many" were watching the following year's playoffs

 

And those "many" likely watched SB 37 with a team largely built by Dungy 

This comment always confuses me.  If the team that Dungy built won the Super Bowl, why couldn't Dungy win it with them?  He wasn't what that team needed as a coach.  Gruden was able to get them to the next level.  Sure, Dungy built them.  But he didn't win the Super Bowl with them.

 

And those "many" likely watch and hear Tampa 2 mentioned, and implemented, on a regular basis

 

And those "many" likely watched several 12+ wins seasons in Indy

Due primarily to Peyton, not Dungy

 

And those "many" likely watched the coaches from his coaching tree, one of whom made it to a SB in '09, won a title as an OC in Baltimore and took Detroit to the playoffs last year, and another made it to a SB in '06.

Doesn't mean he's a good coach.  He might be able to teach his coordinators well or perhaps he simply knows how to find good coordinators, but that doesn't mean he was a good coach.

 

and so on . . .

 

 

 

What was Polian doing while "Dungy was building the team ?" 

[21isSuperman]

What was Polian doing while "Dungy was building the team ?" 

Super Bowl 37 = Tampa, not Indy.  Polian has nothing to do with that one

[Yehoodi]

 

Perhaps,

 

But those same "many" were watching the following year's playoffs

 

And those "many" likely watched SB 37 with a team largely built by Dungy 

This comment always confuses me.  If the team that Dungy built won the Super Bowl, why couldn't Dungy win it with them?  He wasn't what that team needed as a coach.  Gruden was able to get them to the next level.  Sure, Dungy built them.  But he didn't win the Super Bowl with them.

 

And those "many" likely watch and hear Tampa 2 mentioned, and implemented, on a regular basis

 

And those "many" likely watched several 12+ wins seasons in Indy

Due primarily to Peyton, not Dungy

 

And those "many" likely watched the coaches from his coaching tree, one of whom made it to a SB in '09, won a title as an OC in Baltimore and took Detroit to the playoffs last year, and another made it to a SB in '06.

Doesn't mean he's a good coach.  He might be able to teach his coordinators well or perhaps he simply knows how to find good coordinators, but that doesn't mean he was a good coach.

 

and so on . . .

 

 

Surely there are no true right or wrong answer to what makes one great.  Is it stats, rings, wins, changes the game, be good enough so show other the way, and/or so on.

 

I look at BB and Dungy as having similar careers.  They both became head coaches in the 90's with not the best teams and improve them in the right direction.  No they did not make either a playoff winner over night as that takes time with a 53 man roster.  Both coaches did improve the teams in the right direction, BB in Cleveland and Dungy in Tampa Bay, and both had success in the regular season and won in the playoffs and each saw their respective teams move on and win a SB title after they left, 5 years for Baltimore and the next year for Tampa.  And I think both contributed to getting the teams in the right direction and set up to win after they were relieved of their duties.  

 

For me there is something to be said for improving a team of 53 players in the right direction.  Some folks will down play BB's tenor in Cleveland, although it was not stellar, one needs to look at where is started and where is ended.   And is not so stellar records is not necessarily indicative of his intrinsic coaching abilities.  I do not consider BB a failure as he only won one playoff game.  btw the Football Life Cleveland '95 is a great program.

 

Similarly I do not look at Dungy as a failure as he can't win the big one just because he was on the cusp of winning the year he was fired.  To me, like BB, is a sign of how far he brought the franchise in his tenor with the club.  Indeed some could very easily say he brought the team farther than BB respectively did as Tampa won it the following year.  Dungy did have more time in Tampa though.

 

As for your point about he can't win it but Gruden can.  First, he got the team assembled and system in place to have a contender once Gruden showed up.  And Second, on one level Gruden knew his old team Oakland very well and that certainly helped him in the SB.  And Third, you can't take away what Dungy help built in Tampa, is not like he just showed up and held serve and had the same record as previous coaches.  

 

As for your Dungy v. Peyton point, I am not buying it.  Indeed prior to Dungy showing up Peyton was 3-13, 13-3, 10-6, 6-10, not exactly impressive, no?  In fact if I recall the 6-10 (2001) was the season that Peyton had his coach going into his playoff presser after losing to the 49ers.  After Dungy arrived and some drafting the colts go 10-6 and then run off 12+ seasons.   Was is all Dungy's credit no, but its not all Manning's either, its somewhere in between.  Its like Brady and BB, prior to Brady taking over for Bledsoe, the pats were a combined 5-13 under BB, and we know what happened between 2001-2014.  Is it Brady no, nor is it BB, its somewhere in between.   With all great coaches and great QBs they need each to succeed. 

 

Just as I do not give all of the credit to Brady I am not going to take it away from Dungy. 

 

As for the coaching tree, yes I agree no one can say for sure if the "great" coaching rubbed off on to the other coaches, or one is just the fact that one coach is good at picking out coaches and staff who have their own intrinsic value.  And like Cleveland, a lot of coaches came out of the BB tree.  So I do agree that one can not point a finger totally to credit the head coach, but more often than not great head coaches will have staff that will succeed on their own, and on some level it is an indication of the quality of the head coach in my book.

[21isSuperman]

Surely there are no true right or wrong answer to what makes one great.  Is it stats, rings, wins, changes the game, be good enough so show other the way, and/or so on.

 

I look at BB and Dungy as having similar careers.  They both became head coaches in the 90's with not the best teams and improve them in the right direction.  No they did not make either a playoff winner over night as that takes time with a 53 man roster.  Both coaches did improve the teams in the right direction, BB in Cleveland and Dungy in Tampa Bay, and both had success in the regular season and won in the playoffs and each saw their respective teams move on and win a SB title after they left, 5 years for Baltimore and the next year for Tampa.  And I think both contributed to getting the teams in the right direction and set up to win after they were relieved of their duties.  

 

For me there is something to be said for improving a team of 53 players in the right direction.  Some folks will down play BB's tenor in Cleveland, although it was not stellar, one needs to look at where is started and where is ended.   And is not so stellar records is not necessarily indicative of his intrinsic coaching abilities.  I do not consider BB a failure as he only won one playoff game.  btw the Football Life Cleveland '95 is a great program.

 

Similarly I do not look at Dungy as a failure as he can't win the big one just because he was on the cusp of winning the year he was fired.  To me, like BB, is a sign of how far he brought the franchise in his tenor with the club.  Indeed some could very easily say he brought the team farther than BB respectively did as Tampa won it the following year.  Dungy did have more time in Tampa though.

 

As for your point about he can't win it but Gruden can.  First, he got the team assembled and system in place to have a contender once Gruden showed up.  And Second, on one level Gruden knew his old team Oakland very well and that certainly helped him in the SB.  And Third, you can't take away what Dungy help built in Tampa, is not like he just showed up and held serve and had the same record as previous coaches.  

 

As for your Dungy v. Peyton point, I am not buying it.  Indeed prior to Dungy showing up Peyton was 3-13, 13-3, 10-6, 6-10, not exactly impressive, no?  In fact if I recall the 6-10 (2001) was the season that Peyton had his coach going into his playoff presser after losing to the 49ers.  After Dungy arrived and some drafting the colts go 10-6 and then run off 12+ seasons.   Was is all Dungy's credit no, but its not all Manning's either, its somewhere in between.  Its like Brady and BB, prior to Brady taking over for Bledsoe, the pats were a combined 5-13 under BB, and we know what happened between 2001-2014.  Is it Brady no, nor is it BB, its somewhere in between.   With all great coaches and great QBs they need each to succeed. 

 

As for the coaching tree, yes I agree no one can say for sure if the "great" coaching rubbed off on to the other coaches, or one is just the fact that one coach is good at picking out coaches and staff who have their own intrinsic value.  And like Cleveland, a lot of coaches came out of the BB tree.  So I do agree that one can not point a finger totally to credit the head coach, but more often than not great head coaches will have staff that will succeed on their own, and on some level it is an indication of the quality of the head coach in my book.

 

Just as I do not give all of the credit to Brady I am not going to take it away from Dungy. 

People argue and debate who deserves more credit for the Pats' legacy, however tainted it may be.  Some say Belichick, some say Brady.  When it comes to Indy, there's absolutely no doubt why we had such a successful run in the 2000s.  It was Peyton.  Dungy, while a nice guy, isn't much of a football coach, in my opinion.  He's certainly not on the same level as Belichick.  You can say his efforts in rebuilding Tampa were great, and they were, but that doesn't mean he's a good coach.